John Mccains getting negative... Not very smart...

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 03:28 AM
link   
You have probably noticed a change in Mccains approach to his candidacy.
I think it is obvious that Mccain is trying to damage Obama with
"negatively" toned accusations and advertisements.

I personally believe Mccain is going to shoot himself in the foot with this
big time. Unfortunately this is going to to make him a much more polarizing
figure and liken him to the political stylings of the BUSH. There is a era
for this strategy,,, however I think the American Public is in a different
"state" and is going to reject this in mass...

You guys better wake up your boy or he's gonna single handedly hand over the white house!


www.youtube.com...

[edit on 31-7-2008 by mental modulator]




posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by mental modulator
 



Well if you believe our votes still actually count......



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 06:46 AM
link   
So, explain how this is negative but the attacks on McCain aren't.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:25 AM
link   
There's already a thread on this.


www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 09:22 AM
link   
So far, McCain's "negative" ads have been issue driven.

It's not wrong to point out one's opponent's political shortcomings.

Real negative campaigning involves trashing an opponent's character unfairly, which we do see a lot of, but so far not in this campaign.

If a candidate has some real characteroligical problems, such as sex scandals, abuses of office, etc., I'd call those fair game, as those are the kinds of things that affect the performance and effectiveness of a public servant.

[edit on 2008/7/31 by GradyPhilpott]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 12:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dronetek
So, explain how this is negative but the attacks on McCain aren't.



Which attacks?

I don't see any attacks?


I see Obama saying "Why isn't McCain telling you about himself and what he brings, as opposed to simply attacking me?"


I mean really, if that's all McCain has, will he have to make Obama a member of the cabinet so he can continue to attack him?

What else can McCain do? I haven't heard anything from his camp just yet.


Now granted, I agree with Grady, that the negativity of this campaign on either side seems to be very limted and oddly enough respectful.


I sincerely wish that continues.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Quazga]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 12:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
So far, McCain's "negative" ads have been issue driven.

It's not wrong to point out one's opponent's political shortcomings.

Real negative campaigning involves trashing an opponent's character unfairly, which we do see a lot of, but so far not in this campaign.


[edit on 2008/7/31 by GradyPhilpott]



I agree with you that the level of negativity thus far as been very limited.


But issue driven? Comparing Obama to Paris and Britney is Issue Driven?

Really?

And this AFTER the Hiltons pledged $4k for McCain?

Wow... way to go after your Base John.

[edit on 31-7-2008 by Quazga]



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 12:40 PM
link   
McCain tapped Steve Schmidt as a senior campaign strategist early in July after losing some of his team that were originals from the 2000 campaign due to outspending against poor fundraising efforts. Steve Schmidt - a Karl Rove Protege - you can expect to see more of this type of campaigning in the future.
Looking at this from a non-partisan perspective it is very interesting as this type of campaigning is what did McCain in 2000. McCain's campaign could be making a big mistake or they could have made the perfect choice that will help them win. It could turn out to be a very smart move after all - we all have to wait and see. Look at how effective attack campaigns were in 2004.
One thing that I would like to mention is that McCain's campaign is playing this brilliantly so far, get the ads out (although I think the Euro/Techno thing the RNC did was a dumb move), they get played on all the networks nonstop and the pundits on hand discuss and replay the ads over and over and that saves $$ that would have been spent on air time.
The two campaigns seem to differ on how to utilize the net. Obama's team seems to be better organized in this arena with long term strategies well in place. McCain's team is struggling to catch up but have hit a goldmine recently and they will not up on this opportunity in the near future.
As a political junkie all of this is very interesting to me. Any thoughts?



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


2 threads started by Pro-Obama or Anti McCain members worried that "negative" ads are going to hurt McCain?

If it is not very smart or if ya'll think it is going to hurt McCain, you should be encouraging this activity, being that you are for Obama.

If the enemy is planning on shooting himself in the foot, you don't warn him to stop, you just let it happen.

I happen to like McCain's ads. Very informative, and I don't see anything negative. But some people think any criticism of Lord Messiah Obama is an attack, just like some see any criticism of Obama as racist.



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Quazga
But issue driven? Comparing Obama to Paris and Britney is Issue Driven?


I believe that McCain was saying that celebrity does not equal substance and Obama's substance is a very big issue.

As for McCain's relationship with the Hilton's, that would be their business.



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 03:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by RRconservative
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 


2 threads started by Pro-Obama or Anti McCain members worried that "negative" ads are going to hurt McCain?

If it is not very smart or if ya'll think it is going to hurt McCain, you should be encouraging this activity, being that you are for Obama.

If the enemy is planning on shooting himself in the foot, you don't warn him to stop, you just let it happen.

I happen to like McCain's ads. Very informative, and I don't see anything negative. But some people think any criticism of Lord Messiah Obama is an attack, just like some see any criticism of Obama as racist.

Ya maybe I should start seeing republicans as "enemies"...
The American in me wants to have an election process that is purely substantive!
I suppose your only goal is to put the quasi liberal occasionally senile man in at any cost...
The curse of the liberal is being to introspective and not aggressive enough.

I guess standards are for fools-

Well if your tech boys mess with this election you all will get the opportunity to shoot off your guns plenty... hope you have plenty of rounds bud.



posted on Aug, 1 2008 @ 07:04 AM
link   
reply to post by GradyPhilpott
 



I believe that McCain was saying that celebrity does not equal substance and Obama's substance is a very big issue.

As for McCain's relationship with the Hilton's, that would be their business.


Thats exactly what he meant, but luckily for Obama the entire media is carrying his water. Its like this issue with Obama playing the race card. All the media is reporting that McCain played the race card. Thats right, Obama had no racial meaning when he said "hes not like the other guys on the dollar bill".

Those are the kind of perks that come with a corrupt media, in the can for one party. Seriously, ask yourself this question. When was the last time you saw the media defend McCain against Obama? It never happens. Its ALWAYS the media defending Obama and making McCain out to be some sort of monster.

[edit on 1-8-2008 by Dronetek]





top topics
 
1

log in

join